Highlights d Prefrontal activity in monkeys performing a distance discrimination task is metastable d Duration of metastable states is longer before errors d Latency of state transition is longer in correct difficult trials d States may code for relative distance based on stimulus features or presentation order

Previous studies have established the involvement of prefrontal cortex (PFC) neurons in decision processes in many task contexts. Single neurons and populations of neurons have been found to represent stimuli, actions, and internal deliberations. However, it is much less clear which underlying computations are affected during errors. Neural activity during errors can help to disambiguate confounds and clarify which computations are essential during a specific task. Here, we used a hidden Markov model (HMM) to perform a trial-by-trial analysis of ensembles of simultaneously recorded neurons from the dorsolateral prefrontal (PFdl) cortex of two rhesus monkeys performing a distance discrimination task. The HMM segments the neural activity into sequences of metastable states, allowing to link neural ensemble dynamics with task and behavioral features in the absence of external triggers. We report a precise relationship between the modulation of the metastable dynamics and task features. Specifically, we found that errors were made more often when the metastable dynamics slowed down, while trial difficulty influenced the latency of state transitions at a pivotal point during the trial. Both these phenomena occurred during the decision interval and not following the action, with errors occurring in both easy and difficult trials. Thus, modulations of metastable dynamics reflected a state of internal deliberation rather than actions taken or, in the case of error trials, objective trial difficulty. Our results show that temporal modulations of PFdl activity are key determinants of internal deliberations, providing further support for the emerging role of metastable cortical dynamics in mediating complex cognitive functions and behavior.

No abstract

Brain effective connectivity aims to detect causal interactions between distinct brain units and it is typically studied through the analysis of direct measurements of the neural activity, e.g., magneto/electroencephalography (M/EEG) signals. The literature on methods for causal inference is vast. It includes model-based methods in which a generative model of the data is assumed and model-free methods that directly infer causality from the probability distribution of the underlying stochastic process. Here, we firstly focus on the model-based methods developed from the Granger criterion of causality, which assumes the autoregressive model of the data. Secondly, we introduce a new perspective, that looks at the problem in a way that is typical of the machine learning literature. Then, we formulate the problem of causality detection as a supervised learning task, by proposing a classification-based approach. A classifier is trained to identify causal interactions between time series for the chosen model and by means of a proposed feature space. In this paper, we are interested in comparing this classification-based approach with the standard Geweke measure of causality in the time domain, through simulation study. Thus, we customized our approach to the case of a MAR model and designed a feature space which contains causality measures based on the idea of precedence and predictability in time. Two variations of the supervised method are proposed and compared to a standard Granger causal analysis method. The results of the simulations show that the supervised method outperforms the standard approach, in particular it is more robust to noise. As evidence of the efficacy of the proposed method, we report the details of our submission to the causality detection competition of Biomag2014, where the proposed method reached the 2nd place. Moreover, as empirical application, we applied the supervised approach on a dataset of neural recordings of rats obtaining an important reduction in the false positive rate.